IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.667 of 2026 ------

Jitu Kumar @ Jitu, Aged about 36 years, Son of Lal Babu Prasad, Resident of: Shivshakti Colony, Sector-IX/D, B.S. City, P.O. Sector-

IX, P.S. Harla, District – Bokaro (Jharkhand)

… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Dilip Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate Ms. Savita Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, Addl.P.P.

------

P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 21.09.2020 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bokaro in Marafari P.S. Case No.66 of 2019 (S.T. No.49 of 2021) whereby and where under non- bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner and also to quash and set aside the order dated 17.12.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Bokaro in Criminal Revision No.172 of 2025 by which the said illegal order of issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest, has been affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-

IV, Bokaro.

3. The brief fact of the case is that on 21.09.2020, the Investigating Officer of the case filed an application for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest inter alia against the petitioner. The learned S.D.J.M., Bokaro upon perusal of the record found that the charge-sheet has been submitted against the co-accused and cognizance of the offence has been taken while supplementary investigation is going on against the petitioner and by thus considering, allowed the prayer of the Investigating Officer to issue non-bailable warrant of arrest.

4. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner challenged the said order vide Criminal Revision No.172 of 2025. The same was ultimately heard and disposed of by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Bokaro. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Bokaro concluded that keeping in view the serious nature of offences involved in the case that is the offences punishable under Sections 307, 326, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, no illegality has been committed by the learned Judicial Magistrate and dismissed the Criminal Revision.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the courts below have failed to consider the mandate of Section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which empowers inter alia a Magistrate to direct warrant of arrest inter alia of any person who is accused of a non- bailable offence and evading his arrest. It is then submitted that both the learned courts below have failed to consider that there is no satisfaction recorded by the Magistrate concerned that the petitioner is evading his arrest and without recording such satisfaction, the non- bailable warrant of arrest having been issued, both the impugned orders be quashed and set aside.

6. Learned Addl. P. P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P. and submits that the very fact that the learned Magistrate has issued the non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner goes to show that there were sufficient materials available in the record for the court concerned to be satisfied that the petitioner is evading his arrest. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to refer to Section 73 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure which reads as under:-

“73. Warrant may be directed to any person.—(1) The Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Magistrate of the first class may direct a warrant to any person within his local jurisdiction for the arrest of any escaped convict,